[Not a Number]

If the Out OF the Camera (OOC) JPEG files suit you most of the time you can set the camera to Raw + JPEG. This saves both the Raw file and the JPEG. If something looks like some Post Processing is needed you can get your feet wet working with the corresponding Raw file with one of the many suggestion given above.

[ramseybuckeye]

Assuming you are on PC, I'd recommend Adobe Camera RAW or Lightroom

PS. I'd consider RawTherapy advanced RAW development software

Lightroom is good on PC and Mac

Try XnViewMP, FastStone or Irfanview (all free) - you should find something about one of them, at least, that is what you want - then upgrade to some other software if and when you feel the need. When shooting RAW, I always use DNG, rather than the mfr's own version (PEF in the case of Pentax), since it is practically universally acceptable to software (on Windows, at least).

I would agree to start with something free and use DNG

DXO is pretty easy to use as is Lightroom. Lightroom has way more tutorials though. Those are really the only 2 raw developers I've used though.

I've not used DXO, but LR is very easy to use, but it has so much you can keep learning new things and different ways to do things. But what Bill says about tutorials is correct, The Adobe products have been around so long there are volumes of websites dedicated to them.

But don't be afraid of raw, be afraid of jpg. Raw gives you the ability to get everything out of an image that the camera saw. It won't refocus an out of focus image, but it can allow you to fix white balance and some exposure problems among its advantages. As long as you have the raw file, you can go back to an image you took years ago and reprocess it and different way. And a file called a preset can make processing very quick, whether you develop your own or use a canned one.

[Unregistered User 8]

Of course you could always use the software that came with the camera "PDCU" or Pentax Digital Camera Utility made by Silkipix for Pentax, it too will process RAW although it is no where near as involved as some of the others!

This is good advice IMO, because it gives you a feel of what is involved with post processing. Learning how to use basic features will quickly make up your mind whether you enjoy tweaking your images or not. Buying a program might not be the best option until you have decided whether the free program is too limiting.
If you have one of the cameras that has dual card slots, designating one to jpeg and one to RAW for the same image, will give you an opportunity to compare what is possible with both formats. Just my $0.02.

[SharkyCA]

This is good advice IMO, because it gives you a feel of what is involved with post processing. Learning how to use basic features will quickly make up your mind whether you enjoy tweaking your images or not. Buying a program might not be the best option until you have decided whether the free program is too limiting.
If you have one of the cameras that has dual card slots, designating one to jpeg and one to RAW for the same image, will give you an opportunity to compare what is possible with both formats. Just my $0.02.

Sometimes @pjv, we lose sight of what we have and go looking for other options first, I think it is the influence of the internet!

Here is an article on Pentax DCU from 2015! Engaging with Ricoh's Digital Camera Utility v5 - Articles and Tips | PentaxForums.com

---

Last edited by SharkyCA; 04-30-2021 at 06:13 PM. Reason: add link

[dchemist]

I’m happy using Affinity Photo, and can recommend it.

[dchemist]

I’m happy using Affinity Photo, and can recommend it.

[Bassat]

I highly recommend LightRoom. AFAIK, you can still buy a stand-alone version (no subscription required). I've used it differently with every digital camera I've owned. My Canon 80D is amazing with regards to it's JPG output; I could mess with LR for days and never improve on SOOC JPG files, if I get it right in camera. I use my Canon 5d2 exclusively in RAW because I can do better in a few minutes with Digital Photo Professional (Canon's canned raw processor), than the camera can do when shooting JPG. With the 5D2, export JPG from DPP and fine-tune those files in LR.

One huge feature of LR is the catalog feature. LR's organizing/sorting/searching abilities are the stuff of legend. In a few clicks/seconds, I can find every photos I shot on any date, with any gear, at any camera setting I care to input. Need all photos shot with this camera, and that lens, with a certain ISO or aperture? LR can do that, and so much more.

Random comments on other software. I used SilkyPix when I was shooting Panasonic bridge cameras; loved it. My wife still uses Picasa, she loves it. I think it is crap. I've used several versions of Photoshop; it is the definition of overkill for processing digital photos. I still have PhotoShop Elements 12 installed. I use it for downsizing/down-res'ing/screen grabs/HDR. Maybe LR can do those things, but I already know how to do them in PSE. PSE as a photo editor? As hard to use a standard PS, and way less useful. I've tried FastStone and DXO. Neither is worth what I paid for them, and they were free.

With all that said, the best way to post-process digital photos is to NOT process digital photos. Get it right in-camera (easier said than done), and you'll have JPG files that need only minor tweaking you can do with any of the above mentioned packages. Remember, RAW is MOST useful when you DON'T get it right in-camera.

[crazy4oldcars]

Yes, Rawtherapee has a myriad of settings and capabilities, but after a bit of playing, you will find that there are maybe a dozen sliders that you will actually use, and they will be easy to remember which does what. You can also create presets for things that you use regularly.
It's easy, with the sliders to see what effect you're having on the image. If you don't like the result, it's simple to undo.

Kirk B.

[jatrax]

I've dabbled a bit with Raw Therapee but it seems more complicated than I probably need. I'm not the type to spend hours doing PP so I just need something straightforward without hundreds of options that I might never use and would probably just get confusing.

Just because it has hundreds of options doesn't mean you need to use them. I am committed to Lightroom / Photoshop but unless you are going to really use them on a regular basis its not likely worth the cost. Rawtherapee or Darktable are both free and work well. Just figure out a workflow with as few steps as needed and write that down. Once you are comfortable with those 3 or 4 steps you can look at adding other tools to your workflow. But don't even try to use all the options. I've been a daily LR user for 10 years and still don't use many of the tools.

[mee]

First off, please don't fear the unknown especially when it comes to creative pursuits. This is what limits each of us.


Second, shooting raw format is the absolute best way to retain your data. And Pentax cameras, specifically, allow you to capture in DNG format (the adobe raw standard). This is excellent.


Rawtherapee is terrible for the newcomer due to the deep controls. Plus honestly it handles shadow detail poorly compared to other options. You can get around it for the most part but it takes a buttload more work compared to a couple sliders in every other software so I'd skip it. You're probably going to be overwhelmed.


But it's up to you.


DXO Pureraw however is NOT what you're after. It automatically makes distortion corrections, high ISO noise reduction, and some sharpening through splitting the raw into 3 channels and doing some work on those. The net result is raw files 3x larger than normal and very little control on what you get. This is more of a tool to use on special cases where you had to shoot really high ISO or with older gear.


If you want to play around with editing raw images, darktable is okay and free. It looks a lot like lightroom so you can get a feel for it this kind of environment. These are non-destructive editors too so you aren't going to break your files. Trial and error is recommended here.

[UncleVanya]

I use DXO photolab 4. It is easier to use in my opinion than most. I’ve used lightroom but Adobe made me mad and I refuse to use their software anymore. (And no it wasn’t the move to subscription, it was their renewal policies and the billing department wasn’t run by humans. )

DXO has a free download trial for photolab.

Remember with all modern editors every edit is reversible and non-destructive. You can play with it, roll back changes and start fresh. Don’t be too intimidated.

[mee]

Btw DxO Pureraw does actually do a pleasant job at handling noise and optical corrections (distortion, CA, and fringing) on really old images or if you used lower resolution gear

Here is an example crop from a shot of a B-2 I took a decade ago with a 12MP K-x and a Sigma 18-200mm. Terrible hardware by today's standards, but I shot in raw format partly thinking of the future. Today is the future.

This is a pretty dramatic case, but sharing to show what raw editing can do for you. Again, Pureraw isn't what you're after given your direction. It's more a one off product on special cases, but it does give an idea of why we shoot in raw format and not in jpg. It's also why I don't appreciate heavily baked in NR in camera as algorithms are improving in software incrementally all the time.

[Michail_P]

Lots of advice already given. Adobe Camera Raw is as simple as it possibly gets with raw editing. You will learn it fast and get the results you hope for. Basic at first yet powerful and effective if you dig deep.

[Rondec]

Lightroom has the easiest interface. Darktable and Raw Therapee are cheaper (free). Darktable is easier to use of the two. RT is probably a bit more robust with regard to what it can do with noise reduction/sharpening/pixel shift.

There are lots of other programs out there. The big thing is to find one that you want to use and then invest time in learning its interface and how to get the most out of it. With Lightroom there are a number of books that will give you pointers on using it that could be helpful -- not sure about the other programs.

[Kobayashi.K]

... Or should I just stick with jpg's and refine my camera settings?

Determine first if you need RAW at all. RAW is used to squeeze out all the available data for maximum quality, for example when you are printing big. However, 95% of today's users are only showing their photos on a screen. In that case JPEG is sufficient because a screen and JPEG have about the same dynamic range. And actually the dynamic range of the JPEG is only reproduced on a very good monitor and with reduced lighting in the environment.

So, be aware what you want to accomplish, otherwise you are wasting your time, and you feel a robot after some time when you need to convert every single RAW photo to JPEG by applying the same settings, and struggling to get the same quality and appearance of a JPEG produced with one of the Custom Image settings.

My impression is that many users shoot RAW because they think it looks professional, but they actually don't need it. Take a look on Ricoh's web site on the Photographer’s Perspective page, quite a few (professional) photographers are shooting JPEG with Custom Image.

Impressions | Photographer’s perspective
Impressions | PENTAX K-3 Mark III | RICOH IMAGING